If you have been in court for than a couple of times, you have most likely learned that whatever you thought was going to happen, doesn’t happen. Or, perhaps you didn’t have a clue what was going to
happen, thus left in a state of confusion. You might even reflect on the event to try to make sense out of it. In stead of making sense you realize that you have learned something completely unexpected and unrelated to the reason you are in court. I am here to reassure you that you are 1) not alone; 2) you experienced a normal court situation; 3) you are not the problem and; 4) the events had nothing to do with you.
The following story is one of my many such experiences. Read on and appreciate the irony and laugh because that’s about all one can do, I am SO much happier and less stressed for laughter.
A couple of weeks ago I went to my most recent status hearing where the judge had also ordered an in camera interview with my child. In camera interview is where the judge speaks privately with the child in chambers. The only other people present are the court reporter and the Guardian ad Litem (GAL). In this case the HCcP attorney was also present. Since I’m pro se (representing myself) and the mother, the judge did not allow me to be present at the interview. The HCcP was not allowed to be present either.
The reason for the in camera interview was because of my written challenge to the custody evaluator’s psychological evaluation and custody recommendations. (A story for another post.) In brief, the evaluator justified the HCcP’s clinically significant finding of personality disorders as measurement error and recommended the HCcP all parental rights, including parental residency.
Since I have interpreted psychological test results for more than 30 years, I challenged the evaluator’s recommendations, providing support (documentation) for my claims. My analysis concerned the judge such that he refused to make a ruling on parental responsibilities or increase HCcP’s parenting time until he conducted in camera interview with the child and had a third party forensic psychologist to provide an unbiased report of the testing.
At the status hearing and prior to the in camera interview with my child, the judge met with the other counsel and the GAL. The judge would not allow me to be present, however, I had the legal right to be present at this meeting as I have the legal right to representation, even if the representative it myself. In effect, the judge created a situation that left me without representation. Alas….I never claimed the legal system is fair, follows the rules or its own laws.
After more than an hour the judge, attorneys and my child come back into the courtroom. The judge sat at the bench, the sheriff took my child out of the courtroom, and we all approached the bench.
Remember what I said in the first paragraph? Well, I failed to remember those things. I thought this was about deciding what’s best for the child, honoring the child’s voice, review of the evaluator’s recommendations in light of my challenge and the ‘unbiased’ forensic psychologist’s report with the end result of a decision of parenting allocation. And more importantly, getting the child either back into the private school the HCcP insisted on her attending, if last year’s tuition was paid, or into a public school. Boy, was I wrong.
The status hearing was directed at attacking and beating me down, finding fault in my employment, actions to keep DCFS (Department of Child and Family Services) from being called because our child was not enrolled in a school (if a child is out of school for longer than two weeks, it becomes a DCFS case of neglect) all of which have nothing to do with parenting allocation, child support, the child’s schooling, etc. The judge
begins inquiring about the whether the child has returned to school. The HCcP starts talking – his attorney letting him speak. If you have been to court, you know that only the attorneys are supposed to speak. The HCcP explained that all payment except for my portion had been made but that the HCcP, presenting so generously, will pay my portion with the understanding that it will be in lieu of child support.
The judge turns and glares at me, damning me for having our child homeschooled and why would I do this to such a bright and engaging child? He states how interesting our child is to converse with, how much he enjoyed speaking with her and would have enjoyed talking to her for much longer, had he the time. Why would I ever think homeschooling would be acceptable.
I quickly stated that homeschooling was a temporary solution until the school tuition had been paid. I must have had laryngitis because no one reacted to my statement. Instead the GAL spoke up in response to the judge’s inquiry, as if I hadn’t said a word. The GAL begins explaining how well he knows the child, how bright the child is and how the child needs socialization and being homeschooled would be detrimental to her social development.
What? How did a temporary solution that kept our child current with her studies and learning new topics such as logic and biology become a permanent solution that I created on my own without thought to the child? Wasn’t having the child home with kids her age, learning and playing a better solution than having her ride in a car all day long with the HCcP doing his errands?
I repeated that it was a temporary solution and never intended to be permanent. No one heard. No one listened. Instead the judge ranted about how the child must be in school and cannot be out of school. And this must be taken care of immediately.
I ask to speak and request that the HCcP pay me directly the child support owed so that I will then pay the school. As I explain once again, that I must use the child support money to pay tuition. The judge harshly asked why I would put my child into a school that I clearly cannot afford. Raising his voice he scolded me for not paying my portion of the tuition. I once again explain that I did not agree to this school, that I have consistently stated that I cannot afford the school and that the only way I could afford the school was to be paid child support. The second judge on our case ordered the child to attend this particular school because it was the only school the HCcP approved of.
Your Honor, last year I spoke to the Chief Financial Officer of the school. The school knew from the very beginning that my ability to pay was contingent on receiving regular, on time, monthly child support. We agreed that I would pay $10 a month in the months that I do not receive child support. When I receive child support I pay the school more. This is what I did in April, when the HCcP paid two weeks of child support. If you look at the bank statements I gave to you, you will see this to be true. If Your Honor would do so, have the OP deposit child support into the account that is set up and I will pay my portion of tuition. The judge looks away from me, annoyed
“No way will I do that! There is NO way I will have him pay you to then pay the school,” exclaimed the judge.
Now since the topic of money has arisen, the GAL jumps in accusing me of intentionally under employing myself. The HCcP attorney inserts her comments of support. The judge listens intently to the GAL as he continues to “diplomatically” explain his compassion and understanding as to why I under employed myself while the child was young and that the GAL understands that I had wanted to spend a lot of time with my young child. But now it’s been four years and the child is older, he does not see the reason why I should continue to under employ myself. The GAL states that it is time that I get a job that is equal to my qualifications.
The GAL included that he knows that I have money and that I hide money. He knows this to be true because I always come up with money when I need it. I frown wondering where I have hidden this money. Maybe the GAL knows where it’s hidden and will share the location with me. Oh, maybe he is referring to the unpaid child support the HCcP owes.
The GAL goes on about the $25 check I send it monthly (I send him $50 a month) is not worth the paper it is written on and “frankly, it’s an insult to me.”
Well, maybe I should stop sending the GAL any money at all. I know my child would love to have a new pair of shoes, extra snacks for her lunch, to go to a movie with me. She would not find the small things we could do with the money an insult.
The judge turns to me, glaring, and demands to know why I am under employing myself. I attempt to explain the circumstances for women over the age of 45 with a Ph.D., who must build a new career, when the judge cuts me off before I finish explaining that I am not the only Ph.D. who is desperately looking for employment and taking work that is below their qualifications and refer my dear friend with the similar credentials as me, who is entering the police academy.
The judge cuts me off, “I don’t care about other people. I want to know why you don’t have a job. Then he begins explaining how I should at least be an adjunct professor at the various universities in the city. I inform the judge that adjunct positions pay between $2500-$5000 per course per semester. Again, he says nonsense because he knows one person who adjuncts – and, he reminds me, going from school to school is not easy, but this person does it and makes much more than $40,000/year and this person receives benefits. I remain silent.
Adjunct professors in finance, business and law earn $7,000-$10,000 per course. Psychologists, social workers, and sociologists do not. That is a fact.
The judge flips his head away from me, signaling that I disgust him with my lame explanations. In a pause of less than 3 seconds, the HCcP attorney seizes the opportunity to pound another nail in my coffin by arguing that I am clearly unqualified to provide an accurate and sound analysis of the psychological tests we took last fall because, “Well, look at her resume (it’s a CV), Your Honor. She hasn’t been a psychologist in, in this decade. She simply does not have the qualifications for such an evaluation.”
Oh, wrong nail to pound
The judge now flips his irritable nature onto her and begins defending me stating that I am more than qualified to provide a sound analysis. “If fact, not only can she do the analysis for the evaluation, she can BE a court evaluator.”
PAUSE.
Now he is glaring at me. Demandingly, he asks, “And why aren’t you a court evaluator?”
Before I can answer, the GAL joins in the attack/defense, “Yes, she can be an evaluator. She would be a very good court evaluator. I don’t know why she isn’t a court evaluator.”
The judge asks again why I am not doing court evaluations.
After I pick up my jaw up off the ground, I state, “I would LOVE to be an evaluator, only I don’t have all the qualifications.”
The GAL disagrees telling the judge that I don’t need any more qualifications. The judge tells me to go to Room 1XX1 and talk to Judge D. He then orders the GAL to send me the information that he has on becoming a court evaluator.
I’m stunned. First, both white men have accused me of under employing myself, then they shame me for not having a high paying job. Before they can take a second inhale, they not only decide what job I should be doing, they assume that I have not thought of this idea myself and shame me for what they think I have not thought about.
I speak:
“Your Honor, thank you for the recommendations. I will speak to Judge D today. I want you to know that I’ve also looked into becoming a certified mediator. The judge interrupts and tells me to take the class NOW. I inform him of when and where the course is.
I was grateful my filter was in because I was secretly chuckling to myself as I thought about the cost of the class and whether the judge would allow me to take the class instead of paying the GAL, if he knew the cost of the certification.
I decide not to mention the cost but move on to inform the judge that I have just started a temporary manager position that can turn into a permanent position. He asks how much I am making. When I tell him $38 an hour (~$76,000 a year) without benefits or paid time off. His eyes become large. The GAL begins trembling. The judge quickly calculates that I am bringing home about $1,100 a week. He leans forward across the bench towards me. He raises his usually whisper of a voice to a raspy type yell and demands to know why I haven’t paid the school. He scolds me, ‘ You should be paying the school and why are you waiting? Your child needs to be in school!’
“Your Honor, I just started the job.” He demands again. I reply again,
“Your Honor, I just began the position at the beginning of this month.”
The GAL now begins asking for his fees to be paid. He states that he will file a petition for fees.
(Really? Is anyone listening to me? I JUST STARTED THIS POSITION TWO WEEKS AGO! Can anyone give me a moment to get paid before accusing me of not paying bills? I’m really fighting to keep my jaw off the floor.)
The GAL now begins talking about his recommendation for the child. The GAL recommends that the HCcP should have another night with the child, extending the HCcP’s weekend through to Monday morning,
the HCcP will take the child to school.
What? All because I am “intentionally” under employing myself, and now I’m not under employing myself but haven’t received a full week’s pay to be able to pay my rent, the school or the GAL my child’s voice is ignored? When just last court date the GAL argued that any more time with the HCcP is punishing the child, that the child is is simply miserable with the HCcP!
Recommend more time to the parent who doesn’t quality spend time with the child? When the child is left in a room that looks like a hoarder’s room? A parent who doesn’t feed the child enough food and whose parenting style is one of neglect? How is this in the best interest of the child?
What does the GAL say to the HCcP? And made sure you do something with the child and not leave the child in the room. Really? Do you really believe that the HCcP is going to listen to this passing comment, when the HCcP does not pay child support? Lies? Hasn’t paid the school and lied about paying the bill?
Have you forgotten that our child is still not in school? That our child is rapidly becoming a DCFS case? Everyone seemed to forget that our child was kicked out of private school for nonpayment and is not in school.
Ah, I warned you not to be surprised. I warned you of the irony of this story and to find the humor in it.
But wait, the story is not over. Before the HCcP’s attorney had written out the court order, I receive a call from the temporary agency who just hired me three weeks ago. The recruiter called to inform me that the organization told them that last Friday will be my last day. I am not to return to work tomorrow.
The Reason?
I have requested too many days off (all the days off I requested were for court). The a position requires a person to have a greater level of commitment. “What? No. Please no,” I beg. Yes, at this point I have not shame. Begging is of no use. I am told not to return and that the recruiter will collect my things.
Yes, I intentionally under employ myself.
As I tell my story to an African American friend of mine she says, “Well, you know I don’t like to through this term around, but….You just gave the best definition of white male privilege (WMP) I have ever heard.”
“Thank you my friend for helping me understand what WMP is. I never understood that term until just this moment.”